Dodson v. State, 364 S.W.3d 773

Dodson charged with felony non-support for six months in 2008–2009.
On Jan 11, 2010, Dodson pled guilty to replace a prior not-guilty plea, under a State-agreed disposition.
The State recommended four years with a defer/deferral; Dodson acknowledged the recommendation and court confirmed understanding; no probation promises were made.
On Feb 22, 2010, sentencing imposed four years; probation denied; Dodson later moved to withdraw guilty plea on several grounds.
Plea counsel argued the term “defer” meant non-binding probation disposition; prosecutor stated the agreement was Rule 24.02(d)1(B) and non-binding on the court.
The motion court denied Dodson’s post-conviction motion; Dodson appealed claiming lack of Rule 24.02(d)2 advisement rendered the plea involuntary; the appellate court reverses and remands.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether failure to inform about withdrawal rights under Rule 24.02(d)2 compromised due process.	Dodson	State	Rule 24.02(d)2 required advisement; error, reversal remand

Dennis v. State, 116 S.W.3d 552 (Mo. App. W.D. 2003) (non-binding recommendation governs withdrawal rights)
Trammell v. State, 284 S.W.3d 625 (Mo. App. W.D. 2009) (distinguishes binding vs non-binding plea terms under Rule 24.02(d)2)
State v. Thomas, 96 S.W.3d 834 (Mo. App. W.D. 2002) (hybrid plea agreements and withdrawal rights analysis)